You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

and the 24 is not our base defense either, it's become a front Capers has went to more than ever in the past simply because we dont support the base very well in coverage, and if that extra pass rush ability doesn't hurry or deliver sacks we get burned in it lots, that seems to be a fact you and others wont accept, and it really just that simple.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. You basically just made the case that the 2-4 is our base defense and gave a legitimate reason why. However, this goes back to my argument that Capers doesn't play our players to their strengths. In this instance, I'd refer you back to our CB's. We draft big, fast, and physical CB's(sparing Shields in the size category) and then we expect them to play zone. If we would play man, our CB's would be much more effective in coverage. Instead, we have a confusing zone scheme. I remember people drooling over Seattle's defense last year. What coverage does Seattle run? Also, look who they run it with. Brandon Browner was a failure in the NFL and went to the CFL for awhile before Pete Carroll brought him back and plugged him into a scheme that fit his strengths. Richard Sherman kinda falls into that same boat; he's big and physical and hardly gets beat.

fan-59 wrote:

people have went to extremes complicating the hell out of this, and thats what is so baffling to me, it's pretty easy to see why Capers does it just watching the games.

He starts out in a base front nearly every game, and we stop the run, it's only when a Offense starts going 3 wide or play action that he has to drop a DL and use more DB's, and if he didn't do it you and others would be complaining about even more big plays down field, I have no idea why or how people dont realize this, but the coverage has to support whatever front you use.

I'd argue that he starts out in a 3-4 base, but this too is why we need to go back to man coverage in the secondary.

fan-59 wrote:

I want more pass rush just like everyone, more base front to, but we have not gotten the pressure consistently enough out of it to support our poor safety play.

does he use it too much? obviously it looks that way, but it's a roll the dice thing, and at times he gets locked into it with no huddle, but if there is a chance they'll option to pass out of a run set he is forced to go coverage over rush, and most cords would do the same thing, what choice is there, especially with Mad Dog Jennings in coverage, the object is dont give up the big play, and to possibly get a pick.

Yeah, bend don't break. How's that going? Just about any defense is going to be on it's heels when an opposing offense runs a no-huddle successfully. The way you break it is by coming up with a solution. Dom rarely does this when opposing offenses are NOT running the no-huddle.

This is why I've been hammering on investing at OLB. We see Matthews and Perry go down and we have nothing. People will then blame the DL. It is time to fix the defensive backfield and the utter lack of depth at OLB. We do these two things and tweak our scheme to fit the players' strengths and we'd be much better.

Dom has run aggressive defensive schemes before. Week 2 against the Bears in 2012 is a fine example. The problem is that he doesn't run an aggressive scheme often enough and I was actually happy that Jay Cutler called him out because he needed to hear it. Our defense is soft until someone gives them bulletin board material. It's frustrating to watch and keeping the defense consistently aggressive is on the coordinator, not the players. Dom doesn't do this; therefore, that's yet another reason he should go.

Seattle plays a lot of zone, in fact they played zone this last week against SF, zone offers adavantages of being able to read the QB and defend the run or RO, they gave up yardage to Kaep, but that had more to do with lber play more than those CB's.

we play mostly man, the off man, and zone is for the reasons I just mentioned, we dont play zone well, but then what team does if they have poor safety play.

and we dont have physical CB, Williams is just getting back some physicality, and Shields is just now becoming more physical, and tackling better, thats part of our problem and they dont compare to Seattles corners.

we have played man and zone in base, and we still get lite up, we cant cover 3 wides with 4 DB's, specially when only 2 have that ability, just watch Burnett get beat in man against TE's or RB's, it's hard to miss it since it happens every week.

you cant scheme around poor safety play, doesn't matter which front you use , or scheme you play, if you got to line up a guy like Jennings at one of those spots your gonna pay for it, he cant be trusted to take the CB handoff in zone, cant be trusted in run support, and can't figure out which WR is winning the route leverage, so basically that is like having only 10 guys on the field, and you cant scheme around that hole in man or zone.

sure another OLB would be nice, better interior rushing as well, and we would see more of that with better coverage in the secondary, your coverage has to be able to support your front, it's never the other way around, the good QB's beat the best pass rush to often for it to be the other way around.